Regardless of what happens with Mueller's final report this investigation has already revealed an unprecedented level of criminal activity within the upper echelons of politics.

The fact remains that we have a number of very high-ranking individuals within the GOP and Trump's inner circle convicted, and others awaiting trial. How can the outcome possibly be considered repudiation of the special council?

Regardless of what happens with Mueller's final report this investigation has already revealed an unprecedented level of criminal activity within the upper echelons of politics.

The fact remains that we have a number of very high-ranking individuals within the GOP and Trump's inner circle convicted, and others awaiting trial. How can the outcome possibly be considered repudiation of the special council?

I'm asking you drop the "Trump Colluded" narrative. You can rant and rave against all the other crimes. Stop feeding the conspiracy theory, go after actual crimes. Can we agree on that?

They don't seem to care for Trump either, but they aren't aligned with CNN or MSNBC.

From what I've gathered from all the various news sources, including FOX, is Trump is a scumbag to the highest degree. Somebody should have assinated him by now, but it hasn't happened.I'm really surprised Jeff Bezos or a "go fund me" campaign hasn't put him in the grave. Hopefully, we'll get lucky and it will happen on the eve of the election when there's no other GOP scumbags running against him. Mitch needs a funeral too.

They don't seem to care for Trump either, but they aren't aligned with CNN or MSNBC.

From what I've gathered from all the various news sources, including FOX, is Trump is a scumbag to the highest degree. Somebody should have assinated him by now, but it hasn't happened. I'm really surprised Jeff Bezos or a "go fund me" campaign hasn't put him in the grave. Hopefully, we'll get lucky and it will happen on the eve of the election when there's no other GOP scumbags running against him. Mitch needs a funeral too.

My biased .02

"MAGA"!!

Hoping for assassination and death. Who is being a scumbag?

BTW, most politicians are scumbags. When one believes they need millions to run a campaign one ends up taking money and becoming a scumbag.

Regardless of what happens with Mueller's final report this investigation has already revealed an unprecedented level of criminal activity within the upper echelons of politics.

The fact remains that we have a number of very high-ranking individuals within the GOP and Trump's inner circle convicted, and others awaiting trial. How can the outcome possibly be considered repudiation of the special council?

I'm asking you drop the "Trump Colluded" narrative. You can rant and rave against all the other crimes. Stop feeding the conspiracy theory, go after actual crimes. Can we agree on that?

Regardless of what happens with Mueller's final report this investigation has already revealed an unprecedented level of criminal activity within the upper echelons of politics.

The fact remains that we have a number of very high-ranking individuals within the GOP and Trump's inner circle convicted, and others awaiting trial. How can the outcome possibly be considered repudiation of the special council?

I'm asking you drop the "Trump Colluded" narrative. You can rant and rave against all the other crimes. Stop feeding the conspiracy theory, go after actual crimes. Can we agree on that?

As it has been assumed from the beginning, Trump and his ilk are huge scumbags, they are enriching themselves and willing to sell the pillars of democracy from the inside, and it is quite possible that Putin helped and also holds sway over the decision making of Trump going forward. Kushner is a businessman, looking to sell his influence as fast and loose as possible. He probably thinks he is better than the hard working Americans that actually keep this country solvent. Sadly, he can leverage the access and ability via 'Whats App' to foreign dignitaries with security clearance given by Trump.

And yet many hard working Americans are pacified by showing up to Trump rallies wearing Chinese made red hats and chanting 'lock her up' and 'build the wall' which are completely hollow compared the the real threats. When I hear 'four more years', it solidifies how long America has left to enjoy this nice lifestyle before it is down in the muck with everyone else.

They don't seem to care for Trump either, but they aren't aligned with CNN or MSNBC.

From what I've gathered from all the various news sources, including FOX, is Trump is a scumbag to the highest degree. Somebody should have assinated him by now, but it hasn't happened. I'm really surprised Jeff Bezos or a "go fund me" campaign hasn't put him in the grave. Hopefully, we'll get lucky and it will happen on the eve of the election when there's no other GOP scumbags running against him. Mitch needs a funeral too.

My biased .02

"MAGA"!!

Hoping for assassination and death. Who is being a scumbag?

BTW, most politicians are scumbags. When one believes they need millions to run a campaign one ends up taking money and becoming a scumbag.

I don't think I used the word "hope". Being surprised that it hasn't happened yet isn't hoping that it will. Trump is the scumbag, follow along. It's in the real news, the fake news, the alternative new, it's in the hearts and minds of every breathing individual that aren't brainwashed by the greed and hatered of the lies from Trump & Russia.

You are welcome to disagree, as we are for realizing you faults.

Trump is not making anything better for anyone but himself, from his warped point of view. I admit I've benefitted greatly from his greedy tax cuts, but I realize that he is wrong and his actions are both self centered and evil. You may also enjoy the money that's flowed your direction, but don't swallow the BS that it's better for America or the future. There are many more victims than beneficiaries, and that isn't the goal of a great leader.

They don't seem to care for Trump either, but they aren't aligned with CNN or MSNBC.

From what I've gathered from all the various news sources, including FOX, is Trump is a scumbag to the highest degree. Somebody should have assinated him by now, but it hasn't happened. I'm really surprised Jeff Bezos or a "go fund me" campaign hasn't put him in the grave. Hopefully, we'll get lucky and it will happen on the eve of the election when there's no other GOP scumbags running against him. Mitch needs a funeral too.

My biased .02

"MAGA"!!

Hoping for assassination and death. Who is being a scumbag?

BTW, most politicians are scumbags. When one believes they need millions to run a campaign one ends up taking money and becoming a scumbag.

I don't think I used the word "hope". Being surprised that it hasn't happened yet isn't hoping that it will. Trump is the scumbag, follow along. It's in the real news, the fake news, the alternative new, it's in the hearts and minds of every breathing individual that aren't brainwashed by the greed and hatered of the lies from Trump & Russia.

You are welcome to disagree, as we are for realizing you faults.

Trump is not making anything better for anyone but himself, from his warped point of view. I admit I've benefitted greatly from his greedy tax cuts, but I realize that he is wrong and his actions are both self centered and evil. You may also enjoy the money that's flowed your direction, but don't swallow the BS that it's better for America or the future. There are many more victims than beneficiaries, and that isn't the goal of a great leader.

I admit I've benefitted greatly from his greedy tax cuts, but I realize that he is wrong and his actions are both self centered and evil. You may also enjoy the money that's flowed your direction, but don't swallow the BS that it's better for America or the future. There are many more victims than beneficiaries, and that isn't the goal of a great leader.

Yes. In some twisted irony he has given me more money to invest so that I can retire abroad sooner rather than later.

They don't seem to care for Trump either, but they aren't aligned with CNN or MSNBC.

From what I've gathered from all the various news sources, including FOX, is Trump is a scumbag to the highest degree. Somebody should have assinated him by now, but it hasn't happened. I'm really surprised Jeff Bezos or a "go fund me" campaign hasn't put him in the grave. Hopefully, we'll get lucky and it will happen on the eve of the election when there's no other GOP scumbags running against him. Mitch needs a funeral too.

My biased .02

"MAGA"!!

Hoping for assassination and death. Who is being a scumbag?

BTW, most politicians are scumbags. When one believes they need millions to run a campaign one ends up taking money and becoming a scumbag.

I don't think I used the word "hope". Being surprised that it hasn't happened yet isn't hoping that it will. Trump is the scumbag, follow along. It's in the real news, the fake news, the alternative new, it's in the hearts and minds of every breathing individual that aren't brainwashed by the greed and hatered of the lies from Trump & Russia.

You are welcome to disagree, as we are for realizing you faults.

Trump is not making anything better for anyone but himself, from his warped point of view. I admit I've benefitted greatly from his greedy tax cuts, but I realize that he is wrong and his actions are both self centered and evil. You may also enjoy the money that's flowed your direction, but don't swallow the BS that it's better for America or the future. There are many more victims than beneficiaries, and that isn't the goal of a great leader.

Trump's a scumbag.

Yup, he is a scumbag. My life, my family’s life and my peers lives are better today compared to 2 years ago. Some of that I directly attribute to his leadership. I will be voting for a scum bag in 2020.

So there's zero chance that some other non-scumbag candidate might more closely align with your policy preferences? Because what you're describing sounds like blind loyalty, regardless of what the election is actually about.

It is hard for me to see a path to victory for Trump in 2020 considering how narrowly he won and how he lost the popular vote. He has done little to expand his appeal and has done plenty to narrow his support. That said, I have to temper my expectations as my fellow Americans continue to disappoint me time and again when it comes to basic decency, respect, and rational thinking.

Personal benefits from this presidency include the expectation of ridiculously low taxes for us when we FIRE in a couple of years with a very luxurious stash. Due to these forums I also learned about my eligibility to register as a British citizen just after the last presidential elections. So thanks to you fine folks as well as the pits of Trump-inspired despair, I am a dual national today. My life is materially improved by merely the peace of mind that comes with knowing I have an escape plan if things really start to fall apart here. Granted, Brexit is a big disappointment, but they still have a robust democracy and universal healthcare. Thanks, Trump!

So there's zero chance that some other non-scumbag candidate might more closely align with your policy preferences? Because what you're describing sounds like blind loyalty, regardless of what the election is actually about.

Good point. It's possible. Generally I see most politicians as scumbags. Trump is the only scumbag who does not try and hide it. I kind of respect that. But if another scumbag has a better plan for us. I would be glad to vote for him or her. I'll keep my eyes and ears open.

It is hard for me to see a path to victory for Trump in 2020 considering how narrowly he won and how he lost the popular vote. He has done little to expand his appeal and has done plenty to narrow his support. That said, I have to temper my expectations as my fellow Americans continue to disappoint me time and again when it comes to basic decency, respect, and rational thinking.

Name me 2 presidents that have lost the incumbent seat when the economy is strong? And boy oh boy is the economy strong today.

It is hard for me to see a path to victory for Trump in 2020 considering how narrowly he won and how he lost the popular vote. He has done little to expand his appeal and has done plenty to narrow his support. That said, I have to temper my expectations as my fellow Americans continue to disappoint me time and again when it comes to basic decency, respect, and rational thinking.

Name me 2 presidents that have lost the incumbent seat when the economy is strong? And boy oh boy is the economy strong today.

Why are his kids going to jail? Is there some convincing evidence that they have performed a crime punishable by prison. Is there a conviction or a legitimate source you can point us to. Sounds to me like your side lost and now its time to take off the complainy pants, and figure out what went wrong for your team. So far the democrats don't get why they lost. They seem to attribute the loss to 46% of Americans being ignorant racists. With that mentality they very well may lose again.

It is hard for me to see a path to victory for Trump in 2020 considering how narrowly he won and how he lost the popular vote. He has done little to expand his appeal and has done plenty to narrow his support. That said, I have to temper my expectations as my fellow Americans continue to disappoint me time and again when it comes to basic decency, respect, and rational thinking.

Name me 2 presidents that have lost the incumbent seat when the economy is strong? And boy oh boy is the economy strong today.

For now. The yield curve did just invert so don't jinx the econ now.

I saw that. I don't know what to make of it considering all the other positive metrics. Hopefully it is a meaningless blip.

On the other side, I am semi-retired with plans of retiring soon. I would honestly prefer a small recession to occur prior to me officially pulling the plug.

Sounds to me like your side lost and now its time to take off the complainy pants, and figure out what went wrong for your team. So far the democrats don't get why they lost. They seem to attribute the loss to 46% of Americans being ignorant racists. With that mentality they very well may lose again.

Enjoyit is right, if the election strategy of the dems is to say anyone is better than Trump, it won't work.

How odd, I had a post on almost the same points 8 months ago. That was before I became a CRT (critical race theory) jedi-master so don't reply to that thread or anything, its outdated, I can prob write something way better now. Just thought there are some similarities.

Name me 2 presidents that have lost the incumbent seat when the economy is strong? And boy oh boy is the economy strong today.

The counterpoint to this argument is to try to name one other president who won an election with only 46% of the popular vote, a 35% favorable rating, half of his senior staffers in jail, and a hostile foreign power openly trying to subvert our democracy in order to help him win. Trump is historically unpopular for a winning candidate, in a truly unprecedented way, and has been since his first day in office. His opponents will have to seriously fumble in order to lose to him.

He only beat Hillary because of a coordinated Russian propaganda campaign to convince people to hate her as a person, despite of her much more popular policy positions. I doubt they can pull that same stunt again without anyone noticing. I'll be shocked if he wins a second term.

Enjoyit is right, if the election strategy of the dems is to say anyone is better than Trump, it won't work.

Trump has consistently polled behind a generic democratic candidate for every single day of his presidency. Putting a specific name to that democrat might change the result, but right now he would lose to a nameless faceless democratic opponent.

It is hard for me to see a path to victory for Trump in 2020 considering how narrowly he won and how he lost the popular vote. He has done little to expand his appeal and has done plenty to narrow his support. That said, I have to temper my expectations as my fellow Americans continue to disappoint me time and again when it comes to basic decency, respect, and rational thinking.

Name me 2 presidents that have lost the incumbent seat when the economy is strong? And boy oh boy is the economy strong today.

The strong economy didn’t help republicans in the most recent midterm elections. While not part of the popular narrative, Carter’s economy in terms of job growth and economic growth outpaced Trump’s and he lost re-election. I think Trumps re-election will hinge on whether people care more about the economy (which will be in a verrry long in the tooth expansion next year), or will be mobilized along the same lines as what drove people to the polls in the midterms (anti-Trump blowback due to his personality, policies, etc).

We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, spent some time traveling the world full time and are now settled with three kids.If you want to know more about us, or how we did that, or see lots of pictures, this Business Insider profile tells our story pretty well.We (rarely) blog at AdventuringAlong.com. Check out our Now page to see what we're up to currently.

It is hard for me to see a path to victory for Trump in 2020 considering how narrowly he won and how he lost the popular vote. He has done little to expand his appeal and has done plenty to narrow his support. That said, I have to temper my expectations as my fellow Americans continue to disappoint me time and again when it comes to basic decency, respect, and rational thinking.

Name me 2 presidents that have lost the incumbent seat when the economy is strong? And boy oh boy is the economy strong today.

The strong economy didn’t help republicans in the most recent midterm elections. While not part of the popular narrative, Carter’s economy in terms of job growth and economic growth outpaced Trump’s and he lost re-election. I think Trumps re-election will hinge on whether people care more about the economy (which will be in a verrry long in the tooth expansion next year), or will be mobilized along the same lines as what drove people to the polls in the midterms (anti-Trump blowback due to his personality, policies, etc).

Name me 2 presidents that have lost the incumbent seat when the economy is strong? And boy oh boy is the economy strong today.

The counterpoint to this argument is to try to name one other president who won an election with only 46% of the popular vote, a 35% favorable rating, half of his senior staffers in jail, and a hostile foreign power openly trying to subvert our democracy in order to help him win. Trump is historically unpopular for a winning candidate, in a truly unprecedented way, and has been since his first day in office. His opponents will have to seriously fumble in order to lose to him.

He only beat Hillary because of a coordinated Russian propaganda campaign to convince people to hate her as a person, despite of her much more popular policy positions. I doubt they can pull that same stunt again without anyone noticing. I'll be shocked if he wins a second term.

Enjoyit is right, if the election strategy of the dems is to say anyone is better than Trump, it won't work.

Trump has consistently polled behind a generic democratic candidate for every single day of his presidency. Putting a specific name to that democrat might change the result, but right now he would lose to a nameless faceless democratic opponent.

I think we should know by now that polls are meaningless.

Thinking that he beat Hillary because of Russia I think is rather silly. Both sides pulled blows to cripple the credibility of each candidate. Remember Trump grabbing for pussy fiasco. That would have crippled any other candidate but somehow he still prevailed.

You may agree or disagree with me, but Trump is a master at manipulating the media. He understood what he needed to win and did it without the popular vote. I just don't see a candidate that will pull enough people to come out and vote against the economic success this country is seeing.

Name me 2 presidents that have lost the incumbent seat when the economy is strong? And boy oh boy is the economy strong today.

The counterpoint to this argument is to try to name one other president who won an election with only 46% of the popular vote, a 35% favorable rating, half of his senior staffers in jail, and a hostile foreign power openly trying to subvert our democracy in order to help him win. Trump is historically unpopular for a winning candidate, in a truly unprecedented way, and has been since his first day in office. His opponents will have to seriously fumble in order to lose to him.

He only beat Hillary because of a coordinated Russian propaganda campaign to convince people to hate her as a person, despite of her much more popular policy positions. I doubt they can pull that same stunt again without anyone noticing. I'll be shocked if he wins a second term.

Enjoyit is right, if the election strategy of the dems is to say anyone is better than Trump, it won't work.

Trump has consistently polled behind a generic democratic candidate for every single day of his presidency. Putting a specific name to that democrat might change the result, but right now he would lose to a nameless faceless democratic opponent.

I think we should know by now that polls are meaningless.

Thinking that he beat Hillary because of Russia I think is rather silly. Both sides pulled blows to cripple the credibility of each candidate. Remember Trump grabbing for pussy fiasco. That would have crippled any other candidate but somehow he still prevailed.

You may agree or disagree with me, but Trump is a master at manipulating the media. He understood what he needed to win and did it without the popular vote. I just don't see a candidate that will pull enough people to come out and vote against the economic success this country is seeing.

The book, which is coming out less than two months before the midterm elections, at a moment when polls suggest that some sixty per cent of voters disapprove of Trump, may well reignite the question of Trump’s electoral legitimacy. The President’s supporters will likely characterize the study as an act of partisan warfare. But in person Jamieson, who wears her gray hair in a pixie cut and favors silk scarves and matronly tweeds, looks more likely to suspend a troublemaker than to be one. She is seventy-one, and has spent forty years studying political speeches, ads, and debates. Since 1993, she has directed the Annenberg Public Policy Center, at Penn, and in 2003 she co-founded FactCheck.org, a nonpartisan watchdog group. She is widely respected by political experts in both parties, though her predominantly male peers have occasionally mocked her scholarly intensity, calling her the Drill Sergeant. As Steven Livingston, a professor of political communication at George Washington University, puts it, “She is the epitome of a humorless, no-nonsense social scientist driven by the numbers. She doesn’t bullshit. She calls it straight.”

Indeed, when I met recently with Jamieson, in a book-lined conference room at the Annenberg Center, in Philadelphia, and asked her point-blank if she thought that Trump would be President without the aid of Russians, she didn’t equivocate. “No,” she said, her face unsmiling. Clearly cognizant of the gravity of her statement, she clarified, “If everything else is a constant? No, I do not.”

Someone who has very likely done more research on this topic than anyone on this forum seems to disagree strongly.

Name me 2 presidents that have lost the incumbent seat when the economy is strong? And boy oh boy is the economy strong today.

The counterpoint to this argument is to try to name one other president who won an election with only 46% of the popular vote, a 35% favorable rating, half of his senior staffers in jail, and a hostile foreign power openly trying to subvert our democracy in order to help him win. Trump is historically unpopular for a winning candidate, in a truly unprecedented way, and has been since his first day in office. His opponents will have to seriously fumble in order to lose to him.

He only beat Hillary because of a coordinated Russian propaganda campaign to convince people to hate her as a person, despite of her much more popular policy positions. I doubt they can pull that same stunt again without anyone noticing. I'll be shocked if he wins a second term.

Enjoyit is right, if the election strategy of the dems is to say anyone is better than Trump, it won't work.

Trump has consistently polled behind a generic democratic candidate for every single day of his presidency. Putting a specific name to that democrat might change the result, but right now he would lose to a nameless faceless democratic opponent.

I think we should know by now that polls are meaningless.

Thinking that he beat Hillary because of Russia I think is rather silly. Both sides pulled blows to cripple the credibility of each candidate. Remember Trump grabbing for pussy fiasco. That would have crippled any other candidate but somehow he still prevailed.

You may agree or disagree with me, but Trump is a master at manipulating the media. He understood what he needed to win and did it without the popular vote. I just don't see a candidate that will pull enough people to come out and vote against the economic success this country is seeing.

The book, which is coming out less than two months before the midterm elections, at a moment when polls suggest that some sixty per cent of voters disapprove of Trump, may well reignite the question of Trump’s electoral legitimacy. The President’s supporters will likely characterize the study as an act of partisan warfare. But in person Jamieson, who wears her gray hair in a pixie cut and favors silk scarves and matronly tweeds, looks more likely to suspend a troublemaker than to be one. She is seventy-one, and has spent forty years studying political speeches, ads, and debates. Since 1993, she has directed the Annenberg Public Policy Center, at Penn, and in 2003 she co-founded FactCheck.org, a nonpartisan watchdog group. She is widely respected by political experts in both parties, though her predominantly male peers have occasionally mocked her scholarly intensity, calling her the Drill Sergeant. As Steven Livingston, a professor of political communication at George Washington University, puts it, “She is the epitome of a humorless, no-nonsense social scientist driven by the numbers. She doesn’t bullshit. She calls it straight.”

Indeed, when I met recently with Jamieson, in a book-lined conference room at the Annenberg Center, in Philadelphia, and asked her point-blank if she thought that Trump would be President without the aid of Russians, she didn’t equivocate. “No,” she said, her face unsmiling. Clearly cognizant of the gravity of her statement, she clarified, “If everything else is a constant? No, I do not.”

Someone who has very likely done more research on this topic than anyone on this forum seems to disagree strongly.

1 book writer who wants to make money by selling a book thinks something. I wish her success in her book and even if her analysis is accurate which may or may not be, changes very little in Trumps ability to win 2020.

I can promise you this. The election will be ugly, full of controversy and provide great ratings for the media. If the democrats keep throwing out racism and misogyny as their #1 tactic I do not think they will succeed. They can't attack his character because that apparently does nothing. Democrats will need to do better and I just don't see it happening in the wake of a strong economy.

If the democrats keep throwing out racism and misogyny as their #1 tactic I do not think they will succeed.

Did you typo that sentence? Racism and misogyny are the republican platform, not the democrat's. That's been the GOP's #1 tactic for years now, and Trump just finally manged to make it a winner by turning it up to 11. Who would have thought that the only reason republicans couldn't win the presidency for so long was because they weren't racist and misogynist enough?

Personal benefits from this presidency include the expectation of ridiculously low taxes for us when we FIRE in a couple of years with a very luxurious stash.

Really?Don't you think there will be someone upping taxes and sloshing expenses to get the deficit reigned in?

And that will fell on a Democrat so the Republicans can say again: See, the Democrats have no idea of how to do economy!And the bloody stupid people will believe that spin. (Historically there have been more economy crashes in R presidencies than D presidencies. Not that - generally - any president can really do something to prevent it.)

No, it is just a Chinese hoax, and they are pretending it so much that they are the world's leaders in climate friendly energy. As I told in the climate thread, if the Chinese do something, they always do it full, and that goes for the hoax, too!

Coming back from the fun: What I find strange is that all 3 points (put the hoax ones aside) listed as infrastructure are only about faster transport of physical goods.

Do I misunderstand the word infrastructure, or is it the author that sees it in such a narrow way?What about internet (in whatever way), medical infrastructure, healthy personal transport (why not build bike highways like in the netherlands for example?) and so on.

Personal benefits from this presidency include the expectation of ridiculously low taxes for us when we FIRE in a couple of years with a very luxurious stash.

Really?Don't you think there will be someone upping taxes and sloshing expenses to get the deficit reigned in?

And that will fell on a Democrat so the Republicans can say again: See, the Democrats have no idea of how to do economy!And the bloody stupid people will believe that spin. (Historically there have been more economy crashes in R presidencies than D presidencies. Not that - generally - any president can really do something to prevent it.)

I can only plan with what is, not what I think can or should be. Of course taxes should be raised to match spending and address the structural deficit. However no one has shown any stomach for doing that since Bush squandered the Clinton surplus, so why should I think it will get addressed anytime soon? This isn’t logic we are yelling about, it is the US government. Our gov is intensely résistent to things like fact or logic.

If the democrats keep throwing out racism and misogyny as their #1 tactic I do not think they will succeed.

Did you typo that sentence? Racism and misogyny are the republican platform, not the democrat's. That's been the GOP's #1 tactic for years now, and Trump just finally manged to make it a winner by turning it up to 11. Who would have thought that the only reason republicans couldn't win the presidency for so long was because they weren't racist and misogynist enough?

"Warmth, related to intentions towards others, and competence, related to the ability to carry out those intentions, are two fundamental dimensions of how we see others and portray ourselves in social interactions. Stereotypical portrayals of black Americans generally show them as being less competent than their white counterparts, but not necessarily less friendly or warm, Dupree explains.

The team found that Democratic candidates used fewer competence-related words in speeches delivered to mostly minority audiences than they did in speeches delivered to mostly white audiences. The difference wasn’t statistically significant in speeches by Republican candidates, though “it was harder to find speeches from Republicans delivered to minority audiences,” Dupree notes. There was no difference in Democrats’ or Republicans’ usage of words related to warmth. “It was really surprising to see that for nearly three decades, Democratic presidential candidates have been engaging in this predicted behavior.”

One day later, the Los Angeles Times and the Alabama Political Reporter reported that Dees’s ouster had come amid a staff revolt over the mistreatment of nonwhite and female staffers, which was sparked by the resignation of the senior attorney Meredith Horton, the highest-ranking African-American woman at the center. A number of staffers subsequently signed onto two letters of protest to the center’s leadership, alleging that multiple reports of sexual harassment by Dees through the years had been ignored or covered up, and sometimes resulted in retaliation against the women making the claims. (Dees denied the allegations, telling a reporter, “I don’t know who you’re talking to or talking about, but that is not right.”)

If the democrats keep throwing out racism and misogyny as their #1 tactic I do not think they will succeed.

Did you typo that sentence? Racism and misogyny are the republican platform, not the democrat's. That's been the GOP's #1 tactic for years now, and Trump just finally manged to make it a winner by turning it up to 11. Who would have thought that the only reason republicans couldn't win the presidency for so long was because they weren't racist and misogynist enough?

"Warmth, related to intentions towards others, and competence, related to the ability to carry out those intentions, are two fundamental dimensions of how we see others and portray ourselves in social interactions. Stereotypical portrayals of black Americans generally show them as being less competent than their white counterparts, but not necessarily less friendly or warm, Dupree explains.

The team found that Democratic candidates used fewer competence-related words in speeches delivered to mostly minority audiences than they did in speeches delivered to mostly white audiences. The difference wasn’t statistically significant in speeches by Republican candidates, though “it was harder to find speeches from Republicans delivered to minority audiences,” Dupree notes. There was no difference in Democrats’ or Republicans’ usage of words related to warmth. “It was really surprising to see that for nearly three decades, Democratic presidential candidates have been engaging in this predicted behavior.”

One day later, the Los Angeles Times and the Alabama Political Reporter reported that Dees’s ouster had come amid a staff revolt over the mistreatment of nonwhite and female staffers, which was sparked by the resignation of the senior attorney Meredith Horton, the highest-ranking African-American woman at the center. A number of staffers subsequently signed onto two letters of protest to the center’s leadership, alleging that multiple reports of sexual harassment by Dees through the years had been ignored or covered up, and sometimes resulted in retaliation against the women making the claims. (Dees denied the allegations, telling a reporter, “I don’t know who you’re talking to or talking about, but that is not right.”)

Seems everyone is a little bit racist these days.

Nicely dome Whataboutism there. Does this mean that racist behavior in Republican politicians can’t be pointed out until Democrats are perfect? Or can we simply place emphasis on the line that acknowledges the difficulty in even finding any Republican speeches to minority groups at all to analyze?

On the infrastructure list I would like to see the expansion of the rail system nationwide both on the commercial side as well as passenger side. The cost of shipping freight via Trucks has gotten insane and is costing us all at the stores etc.. Having been in the transportation shipping by rail can be as low as 1/4 the price and the rail roads seem to finally be running more efficient after many many years of failure. Not sure how to get there but I am in the opinion it is something that needs to be done. Also would really cut on the cost or need of fossil fuels.

If the democrats keep throwing out racism and misogyny as their #1 tactic I do not think they will succeed.

Did you typo that sentence? Racism and misogyny are the republican platform, not the democrat's. That's been the GOP's #1 tactic for years now, and Trump just finally manged to make it a winner by turning it up to 11. Who would have thought that the only reason republicans couldn't win the presidency for so long was because they weren't racist and misogynist enough?

Do you really believe that 46% of Americans are racist, misogynist, retards?

If the democrats keep throwing out racism and misogyny as their #1 tactic I do not think they will succeed.

Did you typo that sentence? Racism and misogyny are the republican platform, not the democrat's. That's been the GOP's #1 tactic for years now, and Trump just finally manged to make it a winner by turning it up to 11. Who would have thought that the only reason republicans couldn't win the presidency for so long was because they weren't racist and misogynist enough?

"Warmth, related to intentions towards others, and competence, related to the ability to carry out those intentions, are two fundamental dimensions of how we see others and portray ourselves in social interactions. Stereotypical portrayals of black Americans generally show them as being less competent than their white counterparts, but not necessarily less friendly or warm, Dupree explains.

The team found that Democratic candidates used fewer competence-related words in speeches delivered to mostly minority audiences than they did in speeches delivered to mostly white audiences. The difference wasn’t statistically significant in speeches by Republican candidates, though “it was harder to find speeches from Republicans delivered to minority audiences,” Dupree notes. There was no difference in Democrats’ or Republicans’ usage of words related to warmth. “It was really surprising to see that for nearly three decades, Democratic presidential candidates have been engaging in this predicted behavior.”

If the democrats keep throwing out racism and misogyny as their #1 tactic I do not think they will succeed.

Did you typo that sentence? Racism and misogyny are the republican platform, not the democrat's. That's been the GOP's #1 tactic for years now, and Trump just finally manged to make it a winner by turning it up to 11. Who would have thought that the only reason republicans couldn't win the presidency for so long was because they weren't racist and misogynist enough?

Do you really believe that 46% of Americans are racist, misogynist, retards?

What is your definition of 'retard' as you've used it here? Why did you bring it up when nobody else had mentioned the term?

If the democrats keep throwing out racism and misogyny as their #1 tactic I do not think they will succeed.

Did you typo that sentence? Racism and misogyny are the republican platform, not the democrat's. That's been the GOP's #1 tactic for years now, and Trump just finally manged to make it a winner by turning it up to 11. Who would have thought that the only reason republicans couldn't win the presidency for so long was because they weren't racist and misogynist enough?

Do you really believe that 46% of Americans are racist, misogynist, retards?

What is your definition of 'retard' as you've used it here? Why did you bring it up when nobody else had mentioned the term?

If the democrats keep throwing out racism and misogyny as their #1 tactic I do not think they will succeed.

Did you typo that sentence? Racism and misogyny are the republican platform, not the democrat's. That's been the GOP's #1 tactic for years now, and Trump just finally manged to make it a winner by turning it up to 11. Who would have thought that the only reason republicans couldn't win the presidency for so long was because they weren't racist and misogynist enough?

Do you really believe that 46% of Americans are racist, misogynist, retards?

What is your definition of 'retard' as you've used it here? Why did you bring it up when nobody else had mentioned the term?

If the democrats keep throwing out racism and misogyny as their #1 tactic I do not think they will succeed.

Did you typo that sentence? Racism and misogyny are the republican platform, not the democrat's. That's been the GOP's #1 tactic for years now, and Trump just finally manged to make it a winner by turning it up to 11. Who would have thought that the only reason republicans couldn't win the presidency for so long was because they weren't racist and misogynist enough?

Do you really believe that 46% of Americans are racist, misogynist, retards?

What is your definition of 'retard' as you've used it here? Why did you bring it up when nobody else had mentioned the term?

Lacking intelligence.

In this case I think the number is closer to 99,46%. Everyone is concerned about their lack of memory, but nobody is concerned about their lack of intelligence...

Do you really believe that 46% of Americans are racist, misogynist, retards?

I definitely didn't say that, and frankly I'm starting to get pissed off that you keep putting my words in my mouth. Would you please stop? I can only be polite for so long, and you're pushing your limit.

There's a lot to unpack in your question. First is your wholly inappropriate use of the word "retard". Next time you can just write "nigger-lovers, cucks, and retards" and only be marginally more offensive than you were the first time.

But if we give you the benefit of the doubt on this one, and assume you just made an ignorant mistake and only meant to identify some specific traits of Trump supporters, we can move on to specifics. In that case, I would say that it's not 46% but I do think there is definitely a large contingent of American voters who are very racist, and very misogynist, and not very bright. Maybe 25%, all-inclusive with imperfect overlap? Definitely higher in some states than others, but probably less than 46% in every state. I'm sure you're not going to tell me that America has no racists in it. All of the admitted out and proud racists I know voted for Donald Trump.

Then there are some more people who voted for him who are not total racists or misogynists, but maybe lean that way a little bit, privately if not in public. Many of them don't consider themselves racists, and even say things like "I'm not racist, but..." and then follow it up with something pretty damn racist. They secretly like the fact that Trump is a racist, but they also like that he denies being a racist while implementing racist policies and making racist statements, because it gives them cover to do the same. They want to be racist, without the stigma of being called racist.

Then there are some people who voted for him who are no more racist than average, but genuinely think America should be led by a charismatic strongman regardless of policies. These folks don't care about the Constitution or American values, they just like the "America, Fuck Yea!" version of patriotism and any thoughtful criticism of our nation's missteps is perceived as threatening to how rad we are at everything.

Then there are some people who voted for him, or failed to vote at all, because they bought into the Russian propaganda machine and just hate Hillary Clinton. While there is definitely overlap with the other groups, this appears to be one of the larger contingents of key voters who swung the 2016 election, and many of them actually aligned with Clinton's policy provisions more closely than with Trump's, but just didn't vote on the issues. They voted on Pizzagate, and Benghazi, and her emails. They voted (or stayed home) as a result of a targeted and deliberate election interference by a hostile foreign power, interference that was seized upon and capitalized upon by Trump and the GOP establishment in order to take power away from the majority of American voters.

I don't think any one of these groups alone was 46% of the electorate, just like I don't think any one group comprised Clinton's 48% of the electorate. But some of Trump's 46% were definitely misinformed or deceived, regardless of their level of intelligence. All of them definitely supported racist and misogynist behaviors and policies, even if they would not personally identify with those labels themselves. You don't need to be a racist to vote for a racist, but all of the racists definitely voted for the racist candidate and they convinced a bunch of less-racist and non-racist people to vote along with them.

Your continued attempts to cast this situation as a democratic talking point are inane. It's not the democrats fault that racists like David Duke went on TV and praised Trump as a symbol of a resurgent white nationalism. It's not the democrats fault that Steve Bannon got a top job at the whitehouse. Donald Trump literally bragged about sexual assault and still pulled millions of votes, and you think the demoratic party is to blame for those voters being labelled misogynist? They openly embraced that label themselves. You needn't blame anyone else for trying to spin this reality.

If you don't like those labels you identified, then you need to do a little soul searching on your end, not lash out at people who stand against the very things you don't want to be. You need to figure out if there is some part of you, or of the rest of the GOP voter base, that does accept those negative labels. You need to learn to see the ways in which your candidate stoked and encouraged those negative traits, and made them acceptable enough for people to come out and embrace them by voting for him. And if you still don't want to be a racist or a misogynist, then consider voting for a candidate who actively fights against those things, instead of encouraging them. I can give you a list of approximately 18 democrats you might consider in 2020, and every single one of them openly condemns racism and misogyny in unambiguous terms. You cannot say the same about Trump.